[dead]
An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
111–120 of 194 posts
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#112[dead]
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#113[flagged]
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#114[flagged]
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#115[flagged]
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#116[flagged]
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#117[dead]
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gnu CL also had problems as a Common Lisp implementation. It works (like ECL, which is related) by compiling to C, which is then compiled with a C compiler and the object code loaded into the image. This approach generates inferior code to that which an implementation like SBCL can achieve. All the Lisp implementations needed more memory than C programs would, which limited their impact before 32 bit machines became…
There's arguably also the part where it was, AFAIK, mainly driven by needs of Maxima and it's declaration (or so I recall) of focusing on CLtL first didn't help things either. In comparison, ECL which forked from the same family seems to work out much better over time.
Another big user was ACL2, but that's been ported to SBCL (meaning, standardized enough to run on SBCL).
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#119[flagged]
Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)
#120[flagged]